Dorji
Kuensel Online
July 6, 2013
To treat our relations with neighbours as state secrets does not behoove a democracy.
The former Chinese premier, Wen Jiabao – who our former prime minister Jigmi Y Thinley famously met at Rio De Janeiro last year – once claimed he had read the ‘Meditations’ of Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius more than 100 times. This fortnight marks exactly a year since the meeting on June 21 last year, and even today amid conflicting reports, we do not know what exactly ensued between them.
For Bhutan, the meeting reflects the famous statement by Emperor Aurelius. “What we do now echoes in eternity,” he wrote in ‘Meditations’ as he spent planning military campaigns from 170 to 180 CE. The Rio meeting, which was announced to the world first by Chinese journalists, will echo in eternity as it was the first meeting of the premiers of Bhutan and China. For our northern border, the meeting is significant, because of its 14 neighbours, Bhutan is the only neighbour with which China does not have diplomatic relations.
Bhutan has followed a conservative foreign policy, with us keeping a safe distance from the five permanent members of the United Nations security council, including China. Considering the geopolitical importance of our small nation, if we allow one of these countries to come in, then there would be a clamour by the other members, including the United Nations, to have an embassy here.
The foreign policy formulated by our monarchs has been wise in its simplicity: what is good for the people is good for the country. And over the past half-a-century, our foreign policy has not been a matter of worry for us, because it has only benefited our nation, which steadily progressed from being one of the world’s poorest countries.
His Majesty made this clear while he was in New Delhi as the chief guest during India’s Republic Day in January this year. He quoted both the third and the fourth Druk Gyalpos: “The destiny of Bhutan is intimately bound with that of India and it is in our mutual interests to further the bonds of friendship and understanding. And, many decades later, in a modernising Bhutan, my father declared, ‘India is the cornerstone of our foreign policy’. To these profound assertions of intimate bonds I would like to state, ‘Indo-Bhutan Friendship is indispensable for the future success of Bhutan’.”
Considering the importance of this bond, our foreign policy is also our public policy. This mutually beneficial relationship has defined our social and economic life; from scholarships to schools, from hospitals to hydropower and from trade to transportation. So, when we feel there is a dent in this relationship, we are worried and, as citizens of this country, we have the right to voice our concerns. As important as it is for every Bhutanese to know the amount of money our prime minister had spent on his foreign tours, it is also important to air our concerns on our relation with a friendly neighbour. We cannot just call it a ‘sensitive matter’ and shove it under the carpet.
As part of the campaign, both parties have mentioned foreign policy in their manifestoes, a political document of action. Therefore, it is hypocritical to say we shouldn’t talk about foreign relations. Page 121 of DPT’s manifesto categorically says the “cornerstone of our foreign policy has always been our relations with India”; while PDP, on page 19, states “will further our engagement with India and strengthen the strong bond of friendship.”
DPT and PDP had this in their manifestoes because, as mentioned earlier, foreign policies affect our everyday life. In any democratic election, foreign policy of the country is debated and dissected and Bhutan is no exception. When Indian government takes away the subsidy on LPG and kerosene, the prices double with each LPG cylinder costing Nu 1196, and we have about 23% of the Bhutanese population living below the national poverty line of about Nu 1,100 per person per month. Therefore foreign policy, particularly Indo-Bhutan relationship, must be debated and voters have every right to know the political parties’ stand on Indo-Bhutan friendship. Parties cannot say ““Relationship between Bhutan and India must be kept beyond and above party politics at all times.”
It is not a coincidence that India lifted the subsidy at this critical point in time. The social and mainstream media in Bhutan and outside point that former Prime Minster Jigme Y Thinley’s meeting with Wen Jiabao at Rio had some role to play in this decision. Time has now come to love the country intelligently. ‘Sovereignty’ is not an abstract term. It is very real that affects our lives. Have we ever thought why Israel, a tiny country, receives more foreign aid from US than any other country in the world? Bhutan is to India what Israel is to US. It is a symbiotic relationship and for Bhutan it is best that we play on this strategic tablet. We have to be intelligent and cautious in our dealings in our foreign relations till such time that we become self-sufficient and have overflowing foreign reserves and INR.
As much as our sovereignty is important and requires safe guard, Indians have the same prerogative to protect their sovereignty. For India, Bhutan is a strategic reality and the support that we receive is not just because of some unconditional love, as many seem to perceive. It is a symbiotic relationship with no runners up. So let’s be smart and not resort to sloganeering. Our elected leaders should have seen the writing on the wall over the past year and let’s admit that we have failed in being cautious. We forgot to learn from lessons of history.
Bhutanese should not be delusional about how we conduct our relation with India. In international relations, there are no permanent friends, only permanent interests, though we call these interests ‘friendships.’ At this point, it is in the interest of Bhutan to have a closer relation with India than China. It is in the interest of India to offer financial and technical help to Bhutan. It is a practical relationship and let us not use diversionary tactics by saying “it’s sacred, lets not talk about it.” The relation with India has been strained, let’s mend it now.
What we do now echoes in eternity. Let’s be real.
